[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by Warp

Some people understand that having cover available is not guaranteed.

That's why God invented the prone shooting positions.

Some people understand that in the real world you might be better off shooting back right now, while going for said cover, rather than waiting to return fire.

It's called fire and maneuver. Not walking about and make yourself a pretty target.

I am sorry to hear that you have never been trained in how to both shoot and move.

I'm sorry to hear that you've never been trained on how to close with and destroy the enemy with shock and violence. It's an infantry thang. Or at least it used to be.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

That's why God invented the prone shooting positions.



It's called fire and maneuver. Not walking about and make yourself a pretty target.



I'm sorry to hear that you've never been trained on how to close with and destroy the enemy with shock and violence. It's an infantry thang. Or at least it used to be.

...because receiving training in doing one thing automatically and necessarily means no training was ever received in doing anything else.

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by Warp

...because receiving training in doing one thing automatically and necessarily means no training was ever received in doing anything else.

I don't know. You tell me. You seem to like that standing around getting shot at technique.

[mjkeat]

Prone works great as does the bladed, elbow on the hip when face to face.

I know I sometimes get going and momentarily swerve out of my lane but damn if this isn't itching for a 20 car pile-up.

fnfal, Shock and violence? I think you have the phrases shock and awe and violence of action mixed up.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by mjkeat

Prone works great as does the bladed, elbow on the hip when face to face.

I know I sometimes get going and momentarily swerve out of my lane but damn if this isn't itching for a 20 car pile-up.

fnfal, Shock and violence? I think you have the phrases shock and awe and violence of action mixed up.

Get things mixed up and confused?

Nevar!

[TangoFoxtrot]

Shoot!!! while moveing ....to cover! The whole idea is to not let the BG have an easy target to aim at...period!

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by mjkeat

Prone works great as does the bladed, elbow on the hip when face to face.

I know I sometimes get going and momentarily swerve out of my lane but damn if this isn't itching for a 20 car pile-up.

fnfal, Shock and violence? I think you have the phrases shock and awe and violence of action mixed up.

Shock and awe is your generation.

And I don't know about you but face-to-face, it'd be all about fixed bayonets and buttstrokes. Of course it's hard to do any of that when equipped with a cute lil thang that's 20" long from tip to tail.

[TangoFoxtrot]

WOW did this thread go way off course! Okay fellas fight nice and tell me what fixed rear sight you recommend.

[K. Foster]

Daniel Defense

[mjkeat]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

Shock and awe is your generation.

And I don't know about you but face-to-face, it'd be all about fixed bayonets and buttstrokes. Of course it's hard to do any of that when equipped with a cute lil thang that's 20" long from tip to tail.

Because that's super efficient. Right? Hold up, time out, let me affix this bayonet. I could simply shoot you but... well that would make to much sense.


DDs fixed rear.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

Shoot!!! while moveing ....to cover! The whole idea is to not let the BG have an easy target to aim at...period!

I agree 100%. The main rule of gunfighting is don't get shot! If we lose focus on that main objective and make the occurance about the other guy, he may take us with him when we send him to the other side.

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

WOW did this thread go way off course! Okay fellas fight nice and tell me what fixed rear sight you recommend.

I like MBUS because once the fundamentals are mastered with irons, fundamentals should be transfered to using an optic.

[LA_357SIG]

I just would like to say, the members here that have adopted the newer CQB training should really lay off forcing that system down the throats of members that didn't. Remember, some people here just like to shoot.

[mjkeat]

Originally Posted by LA_357SIG

I just would like to say, the members here that have adopted the newer CQB training should really lay off forcing that system down the throats of members that didn't. Remember, some people here just like to shoot.

Nobody is forcing anything on anyone. The issue is some of the people who "learned" techniques that have been replaced try to pass that information off as relevant. Some know better because they are aware of newer more relevant techniques.

There is also the issue of those trying to pass off inept techniques based on what they heard arguing w/ those sharing what they know works based on first hand experience and indepth trainging.

Things change as developments are made. This is good. Becoming stagnant, bad. In the tradition of "Shock and Violence," Adapt and Overcome.

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by mjkeat

Nobody is forcing anything on anyone. The issue is some of the people who "learned" techniques that have been replaced try to pass that information off as relevant. Some know better because they are aware of newer more relevant techniques.

There is also the issue of those trying to pass off inept techniques based on what they heard arguing w/ those sharing what they know works based on first hand experience and indepth trainging.

Things change as developments are made. This is good. Becoming stagnant, bad. In the tradition of "Shock and Violence," Adapt and Overcome.

Longstanding fundamental marksmanship techniques have not been replaced, nor have any new basic marksmanship techniques been adopted. All of the effective rifle marksmanship techniques discussed in this thread have been in both the US Army Basic Rifle Training program and the NRA Basic Rifle Course for over 100 years.


Some rifle handling techniques have changed to keep up with changes in how rifles are loaded. CBQ techniques have been used by our military since General Washington hand picked some men to take out the Hessians in the guard houses at Trenton. Free arm standing was not developed recently for CQB. It was developed for taking quick shots at game in heavily wooded areas and adapted for CQB over 200 years ago.

[surf]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

WOW did this thread go way off course! Okay fellas fight nice and tell me what fixed rear sight you recommend.

I am still the type of guy that will shoot out to distance with irons and there are times that I will dial instead of holding off. Therefore I like a rear sight that has elevation and not just windage. I go for either a chopped carry handle or I also like the LMT fixed rear.

Originally Posted by LA_357SIG

I just would like to say, the members here that have adopted the newer CQB training should really lay off forcing that system down the throats of members that didn't. Remember, some people here just like to shoot.

I do not disagree and am more than happy with shooters who are pure recreational types. I love to shoot recreationally myself. I hate going hunting or whatever and the campfire sessions turn to shooting and tactics because that is my "profession". I just don't always feel like talking shop, so I get it.

I think the problem lies when others attempt to interject advice into topics that suggest defensive, critical use, or combat type of shooting when their advice is not always accurate or the best advice available in this day in age. Hunting or gaming, not an issue, but when lives may rely on that information it becomes an entirely different thing. Just to touch on what mjkeats mentions, this is when the "Well if it ain't broke, don't fix it" or "I been doing it this way for 40 years since I was taking shrapnel in **** tang valley" guys rear their ugly head. Since they are so vocal about their ideals it is painfully obvious who these types are, both on line and in real life.

I am 45 years old and been at this professionally for most of my adult life. I currently train and teach the most modern techniques, therefore I bridge both gaps of "old school" and "modern combat techniques" so I get where the thinking stems from and have never been out of touch, so I see the progression or lack thereof over the many years. From what I see online and in real life, when guys attempt to offer more current or up to date advice / information, the old school fellas get a bit upset and it goes downhill from there. "Young whipper snappers think ya know it all". Again some of us old timers can be more than a bit stubborn, set in our ways and often times flat out wrong.

[surf]

Originally Posted by Matthew Courtney

Longstanding fundamental marksmanship techniques have not been replaced, nor have any new basic marksmanship techniques been adopted. All of the effective rifle marksmanship techniques discussed in this thread have been in both the US Army Basic Rifle Training program and the NRA Basic Rifle Course for over 100 years.


Some rifle handling techniques have changed to keep up with changes in how rifles are loaded. CBQ techniques have been used by our military since General Washington hand picked some men to take out the Hessians in the guard houses at Trenton. Free arm standing was not developed recently for CQB. It was developed for taking quick shots at game in heavily wooded areas and adapted for CQB over 200 years ago.

I will add that while basic fundamentals and basic principles and even base tactics, especially for large units remain the same. However there are many changes that occur with gear, equipment, firearms and TTP's. I have been OTJ for 23 years, and for the last 12 working and teaching at what I guess is considered an advanced level. I will say that much has changed in 23 years. Even in 12 years on the tactical side of things much has changed in all the areas I mention.

I will also add that I am a proud Endowment Member of the NRA and hold most of their NRALE and NRA civilian certs and I will be the first to say that they are a good 20 years behind the curve. Great foundation, but still waay outdated. The NRA as THE primary trainer of LE instructors, it is painfully obvious why most LE is waaay behind the curve. Hell my last NRALE patrol rifle instructor course 2 years ago to update all my certs was the same damn material from 15 years ago. I have all of my manuals and the only thing to change has been the 3 ring binder colors and now they go with a bound spine manual.

ETA - I think the NRA and their instructor certs are a good thing, they are a great foundation for marksmanship and base shooting / manipulations, but by far they are some of the most basic certifications for modern firearms training.

[mjkeat]

Originally Posted by Matthew Courtney

Longstanding fundamental marksmanship techniques have not been replaced, nor have any new basic marksmanship techniques been adopted. All of the effective rifle marksmanship techniques discussed in this thread have been in both the US Army Basic Rifle Training program and the NRA Basic Rifle Course for over 100 years.


Some rifle handling techniques have changed to keep up with changes in how rifles are loaded. CBQ techniques have been used by our military since General Washington hand picked some men to take out the Hessians in the guard houses at Trenton. Free arm standing was not developed recently for CQB. It was developed for taking quick shots at game in heavily wooded areas and adapted for CQB over 200 years ago.

Fundamentals are great. We always fall back on them no matter what we do. They're the foundation from which we build. What I'm talking about is different.

------------

I think what we have here is exactly what SURF is talking about. At 34 I feel I am in a great position. Young enough to sponge up good material yet old enough to sift through the crap.

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by surf

I will add that while basic fundamentals and basic principles and even base tactics, especially for large units remain the same. However there are many changes that occur with gear, equipment, firearms and TTP's. I have been OTJ for 23 years, and for the last 12 working and teaching at what I guess is considered an advanced level. I will say that much has changed in 23 years. Even in 12 years on the tactical side of things much has changed in all the areas I mention.

I will also add that I am a proud Endowment Member of the NRA and hold most of their NRALE and NRA civilian certs and I will be the first to say that they are a good 20 years behind the curve. Great foundation, but still waay outdated. The NRA as THE primary trainer of LE instructors, it is painfully obvious why most LE is waaay behind the curve. Hell my last NRALE patrol rifle instructor course 2 years ago to update all my certs was the same damn material from 15 years ago. I have all of my manuals and the only thing to change has been the 3 ring binder colors and now they go with a bound spine manual.

ETA - I think the NRA and their instructor certs are a good thing, they are a great foundation for marksmanship and base shooting / manipulations, but by far they are some of the most basic certifications for modern firearms training.

I have never met a private citizen who was not a veteran who was sufficiently grounded in the basics to take an advanced course.

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by mjkeat

Fundamentals are great. We always fall back on them no matter what we do. They're the foundation from which we build. What I'm talking about is different.

------------

I think what we have here is exactly what SURF is talking about. At 34 I feel I am in a great position. Young enough to sponge up good material yet old enough to sift through the crap.

The context of this discussion in "Iron Sights", not advanced rifle fighting techniques. My contention is that basic rifle marksmanship is best learned by most using iron sights. If you were referencing advanced rifle fighting techniques, beyond the scope of what Army Basic, most law enforcement post courses, and what the FBI Rifle Course teach, then you have entered a realm where shooters would need to have mastered basic riflery prior to taking the training, thus obviating the need for irons.

Armor, Flir, and other technologies have changed tactics significantly and new rifle techniques have been developed to match the tactics. Only a very small percentage of the population is qualified to be admitted to advanced rifles courses and without a doubt, those folks are ready to move past iron sights.

[Brian Brazier]

Originally Posted by TangoFoxtrot

Nice Brian!

Thank you, like I said I tried everything under the sun, guess in the end I am a pureist, I like my rifle with iron sights, handguns with metal frames w/o rails, GI 1911's, and I perfer to have my guns Blued.

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by mjkeat

Because that's super efficient. Right? Hold up, time out, let me affix this bayonet. I could simply shoot you but... well that would make to much sense.


DDs fixed rear.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

You fix bayonet before you engage the enemy, silly.

Besides, what fun is shooting when you can run them through with pig stickers? Cold steel is what drives fear into men's hearts.

[fnfalman]

Originally Posted by Matthew Courtney

Some rifle handling techniques have changed to keep up with changes in how rifles are loaded. CBQ techniques have been used by our military since General Washington hand picked some men to take out the Hessians in the guard houses at Trenton. Free arm standing was not developed recently for CQB. It was developed for taking quick shots at game in heavily wooded areas and adapted for CQB over 200 years ago.

You don't say? You mean it wasn't invented by the commandos with their scopes and lasers?

[mjkeat]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

You fix bayonet before you engage the enemy, silly.

Besides, what fun is shooting when you can run them through with pig stickers? Cold steel is what drives fear into men's hearts.

Just like the racking of a pump shotgun. Right?

Edit:

Originally Posted by Matthew Courtney

The context of this discussion in "Iron Sights", not advanced rifle fighting techniques.

Though you are correct I was commenting on a post that made reference to tactics.

[Matthew Courtney]

Originally Posted by fnfalman

You don't say? You mean it wasn't invented by the commandos with their scopes and lasers?

Initially, CBQ techniques were developed to cook chickens over open flames. Frontiersmen adapted the technique to cooking geese and ducks, then modified it further for rabbits and deer. We now use the term BBQ to denote cooking over fire with minimal use of utensils generally. Exact interpretations are regional. My NRA License stands for National Restaurant Association.